1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

MotionBased

Discussion in 'Bicycle Mechanics and Repairs' started by yello, 29 Aug 2007.

  1. yello

    yello Guru

    I use MotionBased Lite to log rides and find it pretty nifty. Some useful stuff there as well as some just plain and simple nice to look at features... and it's free. The down side of the free level is that you only have stats on your last 10 rides.

    The upgrade to the standard level is, imo, pretty expensive ($US96 pa). Has anyone taken the plunge and is it worth it?

    Or is there another piece of software (web based or otherwise) that's worth a look?
     
  2. bobbyp

    bobbyp Senior Member

    I use garmin training centre because it came with my Edge.

    I'm thinking of moving to http://www.zonefivesoftware.com/SportTracks/. Its free, ties in with google maps and has the advantage of also taking data from my polar watch for non-GPS workouts. Haven't played with it much but it looks good so far.
     
  3. yello

    yello Guru

    Cheers bobby. I used the Garmin Training Centre too. Basic but good though the mapping is limited.

    I'd have a look at SportTracks but it requires .NET - and I was reluctant to load that just for one application. Plus the mapping links to Google Earth and that's a tad resource hungry for by little laptop.
     
  4. Cunobelin

    Cunobelin Legendary Member

    Location:
    Gosport
    Motion based is about to disappear!

    It is about to become "Garmin Connect"
    link
     
  5. redfox

    redfox New Member

    Location:
    Bourne End, UK
    Hi yello, have you really managed to avoid .NET in amongst Microsoft's bounty of updates?

    I was thinking of re-writing Bike Logs in .NET on the assumption that it must be fairly ubiquitous by now, maybe it isn't.
     
  6. DustBowlRefugee

    DustBowlRefugee Über Member

    Location:
    Sussex, England
    Sorry to sound stupid, but what is .Net? I use MS XP and Firefox.

    Thanks
     
  7. redfox

    redfox New Member

    Location:
    Bourne End, UK
    The .NET framework is supposed to be a huge collection of all the bits and pieces Microsoft think software developers need to do be able to do stuff (e.g. drawing a chart) in a consistent way.

    One intention is to avoid each software developer providing their own charting tool which overwrites someone else's charting tool and breaks the original software resulting in DLL hell.

    The other claimed advantage is that the .NET framework was supposed to be available on non-windows operating systems, allowing developers to write software that will run on a Mac or Linux, but this hasn't worked out so well in practice. As demonstrated in yello's case, where the software wont even run in Windows!
     
  8. redfox

    redfox New Member

    Location:
    Bourne End, UK
    BTW its not a stupid question.

    You really shouldn't have to know about stuff like this in this day and age, software should just run. The fact that it doesn't, resulting in users having to sort this stuff out for themselves just demonstrates how badly we are doing!
     
  9. yello

    yello Guru

    Couldn't agree more redfox. The computer industry is awash with assumption - one such being that people have the inclination to learn about all the extra crap that appears to be necessary these days just to use software.

    I removed .NET version 1 when I first set up my laptop and so I have never been pestered to update it. I just can't see the point in the overhead for 1 bit of software! IF I had a few others that needed it, or it was essential software, then maybe I'd install it but it seems to me to be just another 'solution' (to a 'problem' we didn't have) that introduces more potential problems. Over engineering? The software industry loves to do it!

    Edit: Garmin connect appears to be for the Forerunner 50 only so I hope MotionBased stays around!